GNS theory

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The GNS theory of Ron Edwards tries to classify RPG rounds by dividing them into three game forms: gamism , narrativism and simulationism . The name of the theory is derived from the first letters of these three categories. The theory developed from the threefold model , which in 1997 in the newsgroup rec.games.frp.advocacy defined drama , simulation and game as the three paradigms of role play.
The GNS theory relates to game rounds and was designed as a basis for better game design. Often some elements of the theory are applied to individual players or entire systems . Some players find it useful as it can be used to explain why players are role-playing. For others, the division into three categories is too rough.

Game forms

In his article, "System Does Matter," Edwards wrote that all role-players have a largely exclusive perspective or goal during a game round. He wrote that entertaining role-playing games focus on one of these perspectives, and that it is a common mistake in role-playing game design to attempt to accommodate all three forms of play. The three GNS perspectives defined by Edwards are:

  1. Gamism ( achievement role-playing game , GAM): The players want to win. In extreme cases, this can express itself in a game against one another, but also in defeating monsters, deciphering secrets or solving the game master's story. All of these are possible targets of a gamistic group. It's about the feeling of knowing at the end of the day whether you have won, if possible that you have won. Edwards sees gamism on two levels: the social level and the in-game level. On the social level, the players have to be able to improve (“step on up”), to do this they take risks. They try to achieve this with the help of their understanding of the game and possible strategies. There have to be challenges for this at the in-game level. These challenges face the characters who are controlled by the players.
  2. Narrativism ( thematic role-playing game , NAR): The objective of this agenda could be described as “Story Now”. An engaging task or a problematic (human) characteristic should be brought into play. More precisely: the problem must be installed in the game world so that it becomes a central element of conflict. Characters might switch sides during the game, or it sheds light on why the opposing side exists. Ultimately, the decisions made by the players in the game world resolve the problem. In the narrativistic game there is usually no given plot that the characters follow, because the problem has to be solved creatively by the players.
  3. Simulationism ( adventure role play , SIM): This creative agenda is the most difficult to define positively. Exploration is not a side effect, but the main goal of the game. Edwards describes simulationism as "The Right to Dream", but Ralph Mazza argues that this can be said of all role-playing games. Hence, he prefers to use “discovery” than the word that best describes simulationism. The goal is not just to look at everything that appears in the shared imagined space (SIS), but to actively discover, research and simulate. Like a question about "What if ...".

It should be noted that all three forms can be represented during a game round, but according to the theory only one of them can have top priority at any point in time. Mixed forms, so-called hybrids, which represent two different forms at the same time, are controversial.
It is important here that it is not a matter of classifying players or games, but of playgroups. For short , a player who likes to play in GAM rounds is often referred to as a gamist , a player who likes to play in NAR rounds as a narrativist and a player who likes to play in SIM rounds as a simulationist . Similarly, role-playing games that are particularly suitable for GAM / NAR / SIM agendas are called gamistic / narravistic / simulationistic games. This abbreviated way of speaking is somewhat problematic, since by no means all players fit into one of the three drawers and many are interested in more than one of the agendas. Just as a person can enjoy playing chess, debating political issues, and going to the movies, an RPG player can enjoy all three types of game.

The Big Model / GNS

The GNS subdivisions are only part of the " Big Model " theory, which was mainly developed in the Internet forum "The Forge". The "Big Model" takes a closer look at the processes at the gaming table and differentiates between a large number of individual actions and techniques. The big model is often misleadingly equated with the GNS theory. It should be noted here that the Big Model includes the GNS subdivisions, but is not based on them alone.

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Ron Edwards: Gamism: Step On Up . On: www.indie-rpgs.com .
  2. ^ Ron Edwards: Narrativism: Story Now . On: www.indie-rpgs.com .
  3. ^ Ron Edwards: Simulationism: The Right to Dream . On: www.indie-rpgs.com .